Welcome

Welcome to the POZ Community Forums, a round-the-clock discussion area for people with HIV/AIDS, their friends/family/caregivers, and
others concerned about HIV/AIDS. Click on the links below to browse our various forums; scroll down for a glance at the most recent posts; or join in the
conversation yourself by registering on the left side of this page.

Privacy Warning: Please realize that these forums are open to all, and are fully searchable via Google and other search engines. If you are HIV positive
and disclose this in our forums, then it is almost the same thing as telling the whole world (or at least the World Wide Web). If this concerns you, then do not use a
username or avatar that are self-identifying in any way. We do not allow the deletion of anything you post in these forums, so think before you post.

The information shared in these forums, by moderators and members, is designed to complement, not replace, the relationship between an individual and his/her own
physician.

All members of these forums are, by default, not considered to be licensed medical providers. If otherwise, users must clearly define themselves as such.

Forums members must behave at all times with respect and honesty. Posting guidelines, including time-out and banning policies, have been established by the moderators
of these forums. Click here for “Am I Infected?” posting guidelines. Click here for posting guidelines pertaining to all other POZ community forums.

We ask all forums members to provide references for health/medical/scientific information they provide, when it is not a personal experience being discussed. Please
provide hyperlinks with full URLs or full citations of published works not available via the Internet. Additionally, all forums members must post information which are
true and correct to their knowledge.

Author
Topic: hiv infection by oral sex (Read 42414 times)

I have read many times on here that some posters are convinced they have caught hiv through oral sex as thats all they have done sexually i dont doubt them but they are always told that this is impossible by some posters and mods alike. So if thats all they have done sexually and have hiv it clearly is possible . My veiws were strengthened today by reading a comment to a question by Dr Gallant (well respected hiv specialist from johnshopkins hospital) who said even though it is very low risk it is possible.I do believe its very unwise to deny this is possible however low the risk maybe.

I figured I was infected via random oral. But after reading a lot it seems much more likely that one of my Xes is just not being truthful about their current status. It's pretty much irreverent for me as I have it now. I pretty sure HIV isn't smart enough to care how I was infected. Unprotected oral is fun, but you can get all sorts of bugs just not hiv so much. Ymmv

I have read many times on here that some posters are convinced they have caught hiv through oral sex as thats all they have done sexually i dont doubt them but they are always told that this is impossible by some posters and mods alike. So if thats all they have done sexually and have hiv it clearly is possible . My veiws were strengthened today by reading a comment to a question by Dr Gallant (well respected hiv specialist from johnshopkins hospital) who said even though it is very low risk it is possible.I do believe its very unwise to deny this is possible however low the risk maybe.

You've never seen a moderator say it was impossible to be infected through GIVING blowjobs.

What we do say is that the science of hiv transmission on a cellular level doesn't support this mode of transmission. We say that the serodiscordant studies don't support this mode of transmission either.

But we never say it is impossible. Improbable, highly unlikely, yes; impossible, no.

An example of where it could happen is if the person giving the blowjob has absolutely terrible oral health and the person being blown was recently infected and had a sky-high viral load. But that situation isn't the norm.

GETTING a blowjob isn't a risk and yes, I'd say it was as close to impossible as you can get. You'd have to get blown by someone with a mouth absolutely FULL of blood for there to be any sort of risk.

Why do I get the feeling that you've only posted this thread to start an argument? If it starts heading that way, it will be shut down before you can say blowjob.

"...health will finally be seen not as a blessing to be wished for, but as a human right to be fought for." Kofi Annan

Nymphomaniac: a woman as obsessed with sex as an average man. Mignon McLaughlin

HIV is certainly character-building. It's made me see all of the shallow things we cling to, like ego and vanity. Of course, I'd rather have a few more T-cells and a little less character. Randy Shilts

Here are some quotes from JK where he has done all the legwork and presented details...

The quajtification we use at AIDSMEDS is based on three distinct and separate studies conducted over the course of two decades with serodiscordasnt couples. We do not rely on anecdotal evidence insofar as HIV transmission is concerned, especially not now, where the current state of the scientific and epidemiological art is as advanced as it is. With more people living longer and healthier lives, a large enough collection of serodiscordant couples has finally emerged to create blind studies where HIV transmission routes can be studied with scientific quantification.

Oral Dis. 2006 May ;12 (3):219-28 16700731 Oral transmission of HIV, reality or fiction? An update.J Campo , M A Perea , J Del Romero , J Cano , V Hernando , A BasconesHuman immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and many other viruses can be isolated in blood and body fluids, including saliva, and can be transmitted by genital-genital and especially anal-genital sexual activity. The risk of transmission of HIV via oral sexual practices is very low. Unlike other mucosal areas of the body, the oral cavity appears to be an extremely uncommon transmission route for HIV. We present a review of available evidence on the oral-genital transmission of HIV and analyse the factors that act to protect oral tissues from infection, thereby reducing the risk of HIV transmission by oral sex. Among these factors we highlight the levels of HIV RNA in saliva, presence of fewer CD4+ target cells, presence of IgA antibodies in saliva, presence of other infections in the oral cavity and the endogenous salivary antiviral factors lysozyme, defensins, thrombospondin and secretory leucocyte protease inhibitor (SLPI). Oral Diseases (2006) 12, 219-228.

The Romero study used male/female relationships almost exclusively, with either male or female partner positive. The viral loads varied widely, as did the treatment options (or lack thereof) during the ten years of the study.

The Page-Shafer "HOT" study used homosexual males with different partners, studied both receptive and insertive oral sex.

Note the methodology for the Page-Shafer and Romero studies, and how they differ significantly from earlier studies which relied on post-infection patient report. In my opinion, that methodology dramatically increases the validity of the report.link to original post

Scientifically speaking, there is no such thing as 100% certainty. Variables, some of them beyond our current comprehension, exist to make that so.

In the history of the HIV pandemic, we have learned much about human behavior and the analysis of risk. Prior to the long-term studies of serodiscordant relationships, we relied on the following for HIV transmission science:

a) in vitro study, where specific cells were found to be vulnerable to HIV infection. This is the most sound science of all, I posit, because it is directly and continually observable. However, it does not always translate to real-life experience, as a multitude of variables (close to chaos theory, though I do not subscribe) are in play during each individual act.

b) in vivo using SIV, SHIV, or in chimps and other primates. HIV. This isuseful in a slightly different way, as observing the organisms under controlled circumstances is possible, yet variables are introduced that come relatively close to human experience. Sadly, primates react differently than humans when infected with SIV, SHIV, and HIV. Chimps, for example, almost always (I believe science has encountered two exceptions so far) seroconvert, then revert to negative at a later date.

C) Documentation of reported sexual activities. This is perhaps the weakest science regrding HIV, or for that matter, any sexual activity. It is not, for ethical reasons, possible to observe the subjects 24/7 for years, and it is not possible to experiment with people using live HIV (such as putting active virus into the mouth to see if indeed HIV can infect orally).

For many years, scientists and researchers relied on interviews with infected persons and, when possible, their partners. While this went far to advance transmission vector theory (especially in terms of ruling out vectors, such as casual contact), it relied on patient report. As you are, I am sure, aware, patient report is notoriously unreliable - particularly when dealing with socially stigmatized issues such as sexuality, homosexuality, and anal sex. Moreover, when a person is under the influence of mind-altering substances such as alcohol or other drugs, s/he may do things that s/he simply does not recall, or recalls far differently.

The groundbreaking Romero study http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12045500 used that unreliability to an advantage that had not been considered before. It followed serodiscordant couples who engaged in sexual activity over a long period of time (ten years) but used condoms solely for vaginal and anal intercourse. Dr. Kimberly Page Shafer conducted similar studies among gay men in the US, and found the same conclusion.

No incidents of transmission through either insertive or receptive oral sex were found.

Obviously, these studies contradicted earlier ones, which were based on patient report after infection. A resulting round-table discussion amongst scientist and researchers reveals that this is an ongoing controversy.

However, the hard science, the verifiable science, supports Page Shafer and Romero completely.

Recent discoveries such as the fact that there are very few receptor cells in the oral cavity, the fact that the Bartholin's glands (also called Bartholin glands or greater vestibular glands in females do not carry HIV in greater concentration than sweat or tears, leads to the conclusion that getting HIV from cunnilingus is as close to impossible as science will allow.

Even menstrual fluids, which can and do contain infectious blood, have never been documented to transmit HIV. The fact that there has been exactly zero documented cases of female to female HIV supports this.

HIV is an extremely fragile virus, not nearly as hardy as bacterial STDs. When exposed to temperature and pH changes, the elements of the virus that attach to receptor cells almost immediately become unstable. It is unable to infect another cell without these elements (outside of carefully controlled in vivoexperimentation.

Nothing in life can be called 100 percent certain, scientifically. No promise beyond a doubt that an asteroid will not hit the earth tomorrow. No promise that human mortality will always be a constant. no promise that you will not be the first in the documented history of the HIV pandemic to become infected through the activities you describe.

However, if that happens, and I certainly hope it does not, you would be under extreme scrutiny and study, as your physiology would appear to conflict with the recorded history of human physiology as regards HIV vulnerability. It could even lead to a cure.

This site is the only one in which I participate, specifically because it does not speculate into the realm of the theoretical unnecessarily. It does not give Las Vegas-style odds of infection because to do so would be ludicrous. It does not cover it's collective ass by hedging, and it does not promote stigma and fear by contradicting itself.

This site, thanks in large part to Tim Horn's own scientific and research expertise, uses first-tiered peer-reviewed science with near exclusivity. And science changes, it evolves. What was considered a risk in 1981 was certainly not considered so in 1991. Now, almost twenty years past that, we have refined transmission theory much further. No new vectors have been added, and several have been dismissed.

I hope this has been of some service. I know that as a researcher yourself, you would appreciate the long version.link to original post

"...health will finally be seen not as a blessing to be wished for, but as a human right to be fought for." Kofi Annan

Nymphomaniac: a woman as obsessed with sex as an average man. Mignon McLaughlin

HIV is certainly character-building. It's made me see all of the shallow things we cling to, like ego and vanity. Of course, I'd rather have a few more T-cells and a little less character. Randy Shilts

"...health will finally be seen not as a blessing to be wished for, but as a human right to be fought for." Kofi Annan

Nymphomaniac: a woman as obsessed with sex as an average man. Mignon McLaughlin

HIV is certainly character-building. It's made me see all of the shallow things we cling to, like ego and vanity. Of course, I'd rather have a few more T-cells and a little less character. Randy Shilts

"I have tried hard--but life is difficult, and I am a very useless person. I can hardly be said to have an independent existence. I was just a screw or a cog in the great machine I called life, and when I dropped out of it I found I was of no use anywhere else."

As Newt has said before, the odd one-off that seems to be the exception that proves the rule also allows for the loophole through which many pass.

If oral sex were as likely a route for HIV transmission as this forums' members state (at least upon entering) then it would rival Anal sex as a vector.

Which is why patient report cannot be trusted when so many societal and emotional variables are at stake when discussing oral sex. Me, I prefer the science. And the science points to (giving) hardly ever, if ever, and (receiving) never.

If we can get people to wear their goddamned condoms for anal and vaginal sex, we would stop HIV. Period.

Logged

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

You've never seen a moderator say it was impossible to be infected through GIVING blowjobs.

What we do say is that the science of hiv transmission on a cellular level doesn't support this mode of transmission. We say that the serodiscordant studies don't support this mode of transmission either.

But we never say it is impossible. Improbable, highly unlikely, yes; impossible, no.

An example of where it could happen is if the person giving the blowjob has absolutely terrible oral health and the person being blown was recently infected and had a sky-high viral load. But that situation isn't the norm.

GETTING a blowjob isn't a risk and yes, I'd say it was as close to impossible as you can get. You'd have to get blown by someone with a mouth absolutely FULL of blood for there to be any sort of risk.

Why do I get the feeling that you've only posted this thread to start an argument? If it starts heading that way, it will be shut down before you can say blowjob.

Ann this is your comment from yesterday on the am i infected thread, you seem to contradict yourself, i havent started this thread for an argument its a genuine point i am raising . This is your reply to bagera,quote

It doesn't matter where the woman is from, it only matters what you did or had done to you. And nothing you did or had done to you put you at risk for hiv infection.

You did the right thing and used a condom for vaginal intercourse. Condoms have been proven to prevent hiv infection.

Getting a blowjob, with or without a condom, is not a risk for hiv infection. Not only is saliva not infectious, but it also contains over a dozen different proteins and enzymes that damage hiv and render it unable to infect. Not one person has ever been infected through getting a blowjob and you won't be the first. unquote

Now thats a huge statement to make that not one person has ever been infected getting a blow job when specialists such as dr gallant clearly state it is possible.

Ann this is your comment from yesterday on the am i infected thread, you seem to contradict yourself, i havent started this thread for an argument its a genuine point i am raising . This is your reply to bagera,quote

It doesn't matter where the woman is from, it only matters what you did or had done to you. And nothing you did or had done to you put you at risk for hiv infection.

You did the right thing and used a condom for vaginal intercourse. Condoms have been proven to prevent hiv infection.

Getting a blowjob, with or without a condom, is not a risk for hiv infection. Not only is saliva not infectious, but it also contains over a dozen different proteins and enzymes that damage hiv and render it unable to infect. Not one person has ever been infected through getting a blowjob and you won't be the first. unquote

Now thats a huge statement to make that not one person has ever been infected getting a blow job when specialists such as dr gallant clearly state it is possible.

If you read anything I posted above, you'd see that what I've written is based in science and I stand by what I've written. GETTING a blowjob is NO RISK.

GIVING a blowjob is a theoretical risk that isn't supported by science on the cellular level nor by the serodiscordant studies.

However if the GIVER has bad oral health and the person being blown has a sky-high viral load, there is a small possibility.

"...health will finally be seen not as a blessing to be wished for, but as a human right to be fought for." Kofi Annan

Nymphomaniac: a woman as obsessed with sex as an average man. Mignon McLaughlin

HIV is certainly character-building. It's made me see all of the shallow things we cling to, like ego and vanity. Of course, I'd rather have a few more T-cells and a little less character. Randy Shilts

Sorry, but there have been as many credibly documented cases of people getting infected through getting a blowjob as there have been cases of peopel getting infected through cunnilingus. Exactly zero.

If you want to parse "theoretical risk" you can. But in the AM I forum we focus on documented and credible scientific study. And Dr. gallant does NOT represent nor does he seem to reliably state the cutting edge of HIV transmission theory. Read TheBody.com over the past three years and watch him contradict himself over and over.

We have the science to back up our assertions. I have posted it time and again. I am not even sure why this is being discussed, unless there are new studies of which I am unaware.

Logged

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

"...health will finally be seen not as a blessing to be wished for, but as a human right to be fought for." Kofi Annan

Nymphomaniac: a woman as obsessed with sex as an average man. Mignon McLaughlin

HIV is certainly character-building. It's made me see all of the shallow things we cling to, like ego and vanity. Of course, I'd rather have a few more T-cells and a little less character. Randy Shilts

It really isn't a matter of opinion. It's a matter of following the science, rather than the scientist. Dr Gallant is not a first-tiered peer-reviewed scientific study. He is a doctor, and one who has never published any articles regardign HIv transmission vectors of which I am aware. Moreover, he has steadfastly refused to address Page-Shafer and Romero, and their long-running studies of serodiscordant couples.

I certainly do not think I can change your "opinion," but as Andy points out, feelings are not facts. And opinions not grounded in science are not valid, though they might "feel" real.

Logged

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

"...health will finally be seen not as a blessing to be wished for, but as a human right to be fought for." Kofi Annan

Nymphomaniac: a woman as obsessed with sex as an average man. Mignon McLaughlin

HIV is certainly character-building. It's made me see all of the shallow things we cling to, like ego and vanity. Of course, I'd rather have a few more T-cells and a little less character. Randy Shilts

The bottom line for me is that even taking into account the theoretical aspect of receptive oral sex, it in no way lines up with the volume of individual who make these claims repeatedly on this forum (and others) -- there are other "issues" going on.

Unfortunately I have not renewed my psychiatry certification or I would offer up some theories.

Logged

"Iíve slept with enough men to know that Iím not gay"

Granny60

HIV transmission orally is very rare, but I do know one person from Nevada that was infected in the manner as a soley oral person (male>male), one here in Missouri (female>male) where third party involvement was ruled out, and a couple years back read a research paper about a transmission in the U.K. where the couple(male>male) was oral only and they did all types of phenogenetic testing to rule out the possibility of third party involvement to help confirm that transmission was only between the oral couple. Rare, yes, impossible, no.

The ONLY way that I could have contracted the virus was either through performing oral sex on a woman (the only one I haven't been able to locate), sharing a straw snorting coke...or I somehow picked it up while donating blood plasma at a shady clinic in Philly for $50. I don't believe that I could have picked it up from getting a blowjob.

The ONLY way that I could have contracted the virus was either through performing oral sex on a woman (the only one I haven't been able to locate), sharing a straw snorting coke...or I somehow picked it up while donating blood plasma at a shady clinic in Philly for $50. I don't believe that I could have picked it up from getting a blowjob.

Are you saying that you donated blood..they extracted the plasma and returned the rest of your blood and the returned blood got infected during the process ?

Can you get HIV "sharing a straw snorting coke"? If so, I must have been infected five years before I thought I was.

That vector was declared a theoretical risk years ago, and to the best of my ability to research, not a single case of HIV transmission has been reliably documented from that vector.

Logged

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."

Are you saying that you donated blood..they extracted the plasma and returned the rest of your blood and the returned blood got infected during the process ?

Did you sue the clinic ?

I listed that as one of the ways that I may have contracted the virus. When I returned to the clinic to donate (get $50) a second time, I was told that I couldn't donate because the "protein levels" in my blood were to high. This was in late 96 and I wasn't diagnosed until 2 years later (Halloween 98). I had oral sex with the one woman I cannot locate to date, in 96 prior to moving to Philly were the clinic was located. But...there was another woman I met from a swingers ad in 96 after returning from Philly...that also entailed oral sex. With any other partners between 96 and 98...condoms were used and I know for a fact that I didn't contract it from oral sex with them, because they all tested negative. I do know that I contracted the virus in that 2 year time frame, because I had donated blood regularly up until about April of 1996...and had never been notified of any blood borne virus. So...

Seems extremely rare that giving a blow job or oral sex to a woman results in HIV infection but I think its possible. Its just that HIV educators and doctors have to fight endless endless fears about this so its just easiest and most effective to not go that tiny little possibility and give credence to unfounded fears.

Logged

ďFrom each, according to his ability; to each, according to his needĒ 1875 K Marx

Seems extremely rare that giving a blow job or oral sex to a woman results in HIV infection but I think its possible. Its just that HIV educators and doctors have to fight endless endless fears about this so its just easiest and most effective to not go that tiny little possibility and give credence to unfounded fears.

Well it's either that or the blood bank. I'm basically writing off the possibility of transmission through getting a blow job, if that makes anybody feel more warm and fuzzy.

If someone were undiagnosed, no taking meds, with a sky high viral load and gave someone deep throat oral and in the process suctioned so hard that open blisters were caused. Would this be a way transmission could occur?

If someone were undiagnosed, no taking meds, with a sky high viral load and gave someone deep throat oral and in the process suctioned so hard that open blisters were caused. Would this be a way transmission could occur?

Surely you cannot be serious. This fails on so many levels as to be laughable.

If someone were undiagnosed, no taking meds, with a sky high viral load and gave someone deep throat oral and in the process suctioned so hard that open blisters were caused. Would this be a way transmission could occur?

Not according to the science. The hypothetical risk of transmission during oral sex applies to a person performing unprotected oral on an HIV positive man. The oral would have to result in ejaculation in the receptive partner's gob.

As has been said in eleventy squillion previous posts, no reliable documented case of transmission in this manner has been seen.

When you're fucking someone's throat, it's gotta be deep like tonsil deep, cos tonsils have special cells which ferry off alien organisms to present them to the immune system for analysis and destruction (hey ho, trojan horse...), and the viral load of the dibber needs to be sky high, like millions (like new infection perhaps, hard to tell this) to overcome the natural defenses offered by saliva, and the genetic susceptibility of the swallower needs to be high (there is no way to test for this at present) to overcome the natural defenses of saliva. Other cofactors, specifically immune activation which sends special white blood cells to the tonsils to defend (whoohoo, failed body, gotcha) may need to be present (we don't know, just surmise). Gums, bleeding, etc is beside the point (wrong cells, blood flows out not it).

Since acquisition of HIV by receptive oral sex is a marginal event public health wise, this ain't gonna get more researched, people just have to lump it that it happens sometimes (rarely, unfortunately) and it's not the main event, however personally tragic.

So am I to believe that I'm the only person to statistically contract the virus through oral sex (cunnilingus)? Does the medical community just write off the possibility of this form of transmission and file it under "The patient is obviously full of shit, and refuses to admit they are on the DL"?

I'll admit to "experimenting" and having anal sex once when I was about 21. But to be diagnosed positive 15 years later (Donating blood regularly all that time)...would be like the longest gestation period in history, wouldn't it?

I'll admit to "experimenting" and having anal sex once when I was about 21. But to be diagnosed positive 15 years later (Donating blood regularly all that time)...would be like the longest gestation period in history, wouldn't it?

How so? I mean seriously. I was always sure that I was disease free, because they always test donated blood for infections and such. The only reason I even found out about being positive, was because of the blood I donated for my own hip replacement surgery. I was actually a bit peeved at the blood bank for not letting me know during the 2 weeks between my first donation and the day of my surgery (I was told the blood tested positive for HIV antibodies 10 minutes before surgery). If I was really sexually promiscuous, a lot of people could have become infected during those two weeks.

My x-wife was diagnosed at 22 years old with 0 t-cells. She was a sexual prude and had two boy friends she practiced safe sex with before she married her first husband who was found to be negative. She did work at the Boston DMV that had to be condemned as it was found to be a "sick building" apparently fire proofing agents were leaking into the ventelation and was making people sick in strange ways.For me that argues that AIDS can be a toxicological condition and not just a STD but that is just my opinion.

That picture from Rev.Moon made me laugh. At the age of 12 or 13 I was pretty naive and hearing about blowjobs at school one day I went home and gave it a try on myself. I blew on it and nothing happend I was so disappointed. Shortly after I discovered masturbation which worked out real well. The problem with that was my Catholic parents telling me if I kept it up it would turn me into a crazy rapest lol.

So you think your ex got it from a dirty AC filter? And you got it from cunnilingus? Isn't it like totally possible you caught it from sniffing the same dirty filter? Oh Btw, I see you practice Buddhism, do you know anything about what really happened to David carradine?

Maybe you "anal experimented" later on but forgot because you'd passed out? Happens to me all of the time.

Never happened again. And I'll put this out there right now. Kidding is kidding. But all kidding aside...if I'm going to respect other members and take what they say as truth, I expect the same. I've been dealing with HIV and the side effects of medications for 12 years now. It was mentioned in another thread that I've been a member here for some time but never posted. Now that I am contributing to open discussions, that I feel I have something that may be of interest...I would like to be given the benefit of doubt that I really don't have any reason to lie or exaggerate my circumstances.

Never happened again. And I'll put this out there right now. Kidding is kidding. But all kidding aside...if I'm going to respect other members and take what they say as truth, I expect the same. I've been dealing with HIV and the side effects of medications for 12 years now. It was mentioned in another thread that I've been a member here for some time but never posted. Now that I am contributing to open discussions, that I feel I have something that may be of interest...I would like to be given the benefit of doubt that I really don't have any reason to lie or exaggerate my circumstances.

Thank you

Hi Klipsch i can understand exactly what you are saying ,sadly this forum has gone down hill recently as there seems to be a little clique of posters who generally try to be little fellow posters and destroy threads with childish bitchy comments and the mods seem to turn a blind eye to it for reasons known to them. Its sad really as i think some people are put of from asking questions, as if you dare to step out of line of the general thought of the clique they just try and ridicule you.The one trying to ridicule you is the most ignored person on the board so i wouldnt worry about it ,regards tommyP.S. I was th OP of this thread and was even warned by ann for trying to start an argument with an innocent question, whereas i was just conveying my observations of what i had read previously on the forum and elsewhere trying to get some clarification.

P.S. I was th OP of this thread and was even warned by ann for trying to start an argument with an innocent question, whereas i was just conveying my observations of what i had read previously on the forum and elsewhere trying to get some clarification.

I warned you about trying to start an argument because your OP contained false accusations.

"...health will finally be seen not as a blessing to be wished for, but as a human right to be fought for." Kofi Annan

Nymphomaniac: a woman as obsessed with sex as an average man. Mignon McLaughlin

HIV is certainly character-building. It's made me see all of the shallow things we cling to, like ego and vanity. Of course, I'd rather have a few more T-cells and a little less character. Randy Shilts

QUOTE : Getting a blowjob, with or without a condom, is not a risk for hiv infection.

What's you point here? you've quoted a truth. GETTING a blowjob is safe -- GIVING one is where there is some risk.

You keep repeating the same stuff over and over. You start threads that YOU KNOW will cause drama, then you whine and claim victim (and bring up the ubiquitous "clique" or "cabal") when the drama unfolds.

You like to say things like, "you can't bring anything up that goes against the "clique", when in fact -- you are doing exactly what you are accusing others of doing. If folks don't agree with you, you go nuts and claim victimhood. I saw this very same behavior from my daughter when she was a teenager. Fortunately, she grew up -- maybe it's time for you to do the same.

Hi Klipsch i can understand exactly what you are saying ,sadly this forum has gone down hill recently as there seems to be a little clique of posters who generally try to be little fellow posters and destroy threads with childish bitchy comments and the mods seem to turn a blind eye to it for reasons known to them. Its sad really as i think some people are put of from asking questions, as if you dare to step out of line of the general thought of the clique they just try and ridicule you.The one trying to ridicule you is the most ignored person on the board so i wouldnt worry about it ,regards tommyP.S. I was th OP of this thread and was even warned by ann for trying to start an argument with an innocent question, whereas i was just conveying my observations of what i had read previously on the forum and elsewhere trying to get some clarification.

Recently? I have been fiercely advocating for a science-based forum since I joined in 2004.

I will never, EVER let non-scientific stuff slip through without at least commenting on it. I do not want people perusing these forums without signing up or speaking up to have the impression that first-tiered peer-reviewed science applies to some of the claims made here.

Yes it has made me unwelcome to many folks. I am sure I am on "ignore" for a lot of people. And Heaven help me, I cannot feel comfortable talking about my own issues here because of this scrutiny. Such is the price for being an advocate of science.

Sorry, Tommy, I cannot let your assertions go without refutation. This forum, and the integrity of same. means too much to me.

Logged

"Many people, especially in the gay community, turn to oral sex as a safer alternative in the age of AIDS. And with HIV rates rising, people need to remember that oral sex is safer sex. It's a reasonable alternative."